Rough Diamond

Originally posted by Kathy@Mar 27 2007, 08:34 PM
Evidently, this series was fairly popular, so they are thinking of doing a second series! :D
Click to expand...
But the wonderful drama Lillies, which was screened on Friday evenings, won't be getting a second series - there is no justice!
 
the only stupid bit - which im not sure if anyone else has commented on - is that the trainer never wore a hat to ride out; this is something which just doens't happen in the racing world (dressage etc maybe..)

Sam
 
I beg to differ actually - I know people in the racing world who I've yet to see ride out wearing a hat. It's also very common not only in the dressage world but in the showjumping world, eventing world and especially in polo - you simply don't see hats in polo yards.
 
Originally posted by Shadow Leader@Apr 10 2007, 05:47 PM
I beg to differ actually - I know people in the racing world who I've yet to see ride out wearing a hat. It's also very common not only in the dressage world but in the showjumping world, eventing world and especially in polo - you simply don't see hats in polo yards.
Click to expand...
Really - how amazing that such stupidity still goes on .

I remember clearly our next door neighbour when I was a kid being killed in a riding accident from head injuries caused by her wearing a hat without a chinstrap . Her kids were 10 and 6 :(
 
When you were a kid Ardross, riding hats wouldn't have come with straps as standard and many people wouldn't even have worn hats!

Call it stupidity if you like; it is in your opinion. However it is all a matter of choice and down to the individual concerned. I have ridden in the past without a hat & I know people who never wear hats - that is their choice. Similarly I will resist wearing a body protector when riding out until the day I am absolutely made to - I choose not to wear one.

It is sad that your next door neighbour was killed but that will more than likely have been a freak accident and I dare say that stats will show you that riding a horse without a hat is safer than getting in a car!
 
The only time I knew anyone wear a crashie was when required for show events, and they were secured by a bit of elastic your Mum had sewn in! I hated the damn things. They gave me a headache and, of course, over time the Health & Safety people worked out that they didn't stop serious head injuries, anyway. I never used one even after a riding heroine had been killed at 17 because hers either fell off or wasn't there. Personal choice - and there isn't much of that left.

Of course people die in riding accidents or are hurt in them, but I don't recall ever seeing the Queen pictured with anything other than a headscarf on her head when riding - Ardross, please admonish her Madge for her stupidity and demand she plonks a titfer on when next astride!

At least 'Rough Diamond' got some of its portrayals right, then!
 
Body protectors are different - i'd hate to wear one too! Can't speak for everyone of course, but with the few people i've known to now wear a hat, it was a case of them excercising some foolish pride.

Sam
 
New hat designs are now much more really protective, to give them their due. The old velvet hunting caps gave no protection to side impact and didn't stop the brain from being bruised. They'd probably stop you getting lacerations to the scalp, but as a real brain-protector they were mostly decorative. However, even now, there are significant differences between the helmets' effectiveness. I think the BHS has a list which was drawn up by a woman who suffered brain damage because her helmet didn't offer side (temple) protection. She got a load of trials done on various models, with quite shocking discrepancies.
 
Originally posted by krizon@Apr 10 2007, 06:16 PM
New hat designs are now much more really protective, to give them their due. The old velvet hunting caps gave no protection to side impact and didn't stop the brain from being bruised. They'd probably stop you getting lacerations to the scalp, but as a real brain-protector they were mostly decorative. However, even now, there are significant differences between the helmets' effectiveness. I think the BHS has a list which was drawn up by a woman who suffered brain damage because her helmet didn't offer side (temple) protection. She got a load of trials done on various models, with quite shocking discrepancies.
Click to expand...
Slightly off-subject, but according to a 1984 study, horse racing is the most dangerous sport in the world.

I lifted the following from Wikipedia:

In 1984, R.J. McCunney and P.K. Russo published a study entitled Brain Injuries in Boxing. The study demostrated that the U.S. sport with the highest number of deaths per 100,000 participants was horse racing:

Fatality rates per 100,000 participants

1. Horse racing: 128
2. Sky diving: 123
3. Hang gliding: 56
4. Mountaineering: 51
5. Scuba Diving: 11
6. Motorcycle racing: 7
7. College Football: 3
8. Boxing: 1.3
Click to expand...

Maybe newer helmet designs have changed this somewhat but I see the argument against wearing helmets (& maybe body protectors) as similar to seatbelts in cars - to start with there were many who simply wouldn't wear them, but this changed as time wore on (and the law backed up common sense).
 
Trouble is, if, like me, you need to carry accident insurance, you then have to comply with wearing both acceptable headgear and also a back protector. I also hate wearing the back protector but wouldn't even consider riding without a crash hat.

I have a lot of people depending on me being able to do my job competently in the short term at least, so it is pretty daft not to comply - if I do have a bad accident should I ever actually get the time to ride Mags, then at least there are policies in place to cover my absence!
 
Personally, i don't know why back protectors are even being considered being made compulsory - the amount of damage you do when falling on your side or back if unprotected is far far less that what could happen if your head hit the ground unprotected.

Sam
 
Fair enough Jules - as I said to Ardross, it's all a matter of choice.

When it comes to body protectors I think it's all a load of bollocks (that's the technical term!!) really as they don't actually protect much at all and the protection is very minimal. It tends to be the limbs that get damaged in a fall anyway & a body protector is never going to protect you from injury if a horse rolls or falls on you [which is pretty much the only time your torso is going to get damaged] which kind of negates the point of it IMO. Add to that the fact that they're uncomfortable & bloody hot & that's good enough reason for me!
 
The back protector rule is the same as the one that brought in compulsory helmet wearing though - everyone is moaning like hell about it at teh moment and will do long after June(or July - cant rememebr off the top of my head) when it becomes compulsory to wear them to ride racehorses - then gradually it will become second nature.
The laughable thing is that you are supposed to risk assess every horse and decide of you need to wear a level 1,2 or 3 protector on it - how many trainers are goign to buy each member of staff 3 BPs each??!!!!

TBH - I dont relish the idea of wearing one - specially through the summer,I get quite hot enough thankyou very much! but they are supposed to protect your spine and internal organs ( are there such things as external oragans??!! :brows: ) and I dont fancy being splattered across the county when the fields are rock hard - so in all, i think its a good idea.Mind you - Im not sure how much more joggling about my body can take full stop - i seem to hit the ground harder these days!!
 
Well, he won't train many gr.1 winners from a coma - though he could try for the 1973 Derby, lol!

You've only got to think of Chris Kinane to see what horses can do to our heads.

Sam
 
Not quite the best example, Chris Kinane - he was standing in the parade ring! Don't tell me all the owners and trainers will have to be fitted out as if for gladiatorial combat before watching their nags traipse round?

Of course, good quality crash helmets will help to prevent the sort of head injuries which leave people badly brain-damaged, bring on strokes, blood clots, etc. But I would hope that they don't lead anyone to think that they have the effect that seat belts and airbags seem to have done on some drivers: that you can drive like a lunatic, because your safety equipment will 'save' you. There's no magic pill where riding is concerned. You need to be aware that even the sweetest child's pony is capable of killing you if you get hung up in a stirrup and dragged (and who rides with safety breakaways over the age of 12?), and all the amount of skull and body protectors won't prevent your neck from snapping, or your legs or arms.
 
Agreed Kri but just because something doesn't prevent you from breaking your neck doesn't mean that other forms of protection should be dismissed. Sometimes legislation needs to be brought in because people are not mature enough to consider the danger.
 
Back
Top